David
Seelig1 and April Truitt2
Yale
University1 and Primate Rescue Center, Inc.2
Wildlife
sanctuaries are among the most suitable situations in which to place monkeys
and other nonhuman primates at the conclusion of biomedical and other research.
In the past, facilities often routinely euthanized primate subjects, especially
monkeys, at the conclusion of nonterminal studies. However, this should no
longer be considered acceptable, as other options exist which give the monkeys
an opportunity to live out the remainder of their lives in caring, socially and
environmentally enriched, surroundings. Planning for retirement is now
considered a necessary component of utilizing nonhuman primates for research
(Brent et al., 1997; van Akker et al., 1994). Though discussions have often
focused more on chimpanzees than on monkeys, the added attention to the former
species is disproportionate to the far greater number of monkeys used in
research in the United States, for whom retirement considerations are equally
warranted.
Reintroduction
of primates into the wild is generally not possible due to ongoing habitat
destruction, the infectious state of some, and the extremely high cost of
rehabilitation. However, there are a limited number of legitimate sanctuaries
in the United States that are willing and able to provide excellent care for
veteran research primates for the remainder of their lives. Which sanctuaries
meet acceptable criteria for such retirement is rarely obvious, and a large
number of establishments accept primates under false pretenses. The latter may
function as breeders for the exotic pet industry or as roadside exhibitors, or
may simply lack the expertise, stability, or commitment to provide the primates
an acceptable quality of life for the remainder of their lives.
This
article is written to assist biomedical and other research facilities which may
be considering retiring ex-research monkeys and other primates. It is based on
Seelig's experience placing nonhuman primates for biomedical facilities, and
Truitt's research into the expanding exotic pet industry. Seelig is a student
at Yale University and has worked as a behaviorist at several large primate biomedical
research facilities. Truitt is the director of the Primate Rescue Center, Inc.,
a nonprofit organization working to reduce the number of unwanted primates in
need of sanctuary. This organization also operates a primate sanctuary housing
fifty veteran research subjects and former pets.
The
Problem of Pseudo-Sanctuaries
In
one recent case among many, a well-meaning research institution donated
primates to an individual who claimed that he would exhibit them in his
"wildlife park". The individual, who was actually an exotic pet
dealer working under false pretenses, timed the pickup of the primates to
precede two exotic animal auctions scheduled one week apart. The animals which
were not sold at the first auction were transported to the second, living in
shipping crates in the dealer's station wagon in the interim. Situations such
as this can be avoided with careful research and appropriate precautions.
When
Seelig initially set out to assist in the placement of a group of fifty
capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) being retired by a pharmaceutical
company, he posted notices in the Primate Supply Information Clearinghouse and
the former e-mail list Primate-Talk. A large number of facilities
responded, promising to provide life-long care for the primates. However, few
were willing to accept the monkeys if they were sterilized. Seelig visited
several of the facilities with the most reasonable proposals and found that
none fulfilled all of the criteria that would assure a comfortable and secure
environment for the primates for their entire lives. Only after extensive
research were several acceptable facilities located that were able to take the
primates; the process took more than a year.
Sanctuaries
in the U.S. are largely unregulated, which enables any animal breeder, dealer,
or roadside zoo to add "refuge" or "conservation center" to
its name. In addition, sanctuaries that do not exhibit or sell animals are not
required to be licensed by the USDA. This can make it difficult or impossible for
a person with little experience to distinguish a legitimate long-term animal
retirement facility from an animal dealer working under false pretenses.
Characteristics
of Pseudo-Sanctuaries
On
paper, pseudo-sanctuaries seem to closely resemble legitimate ones. However, a
site inspection reveals significant differences in facilities and in the
attitudes the care staff and administration hold towards the animals.
Many
pseudo-sanctuaries sell primates and their offspring as pets to support the
owners and their facilities (see Footnote).
Infant monkeys are sold to private owners for three to five thousand dollars
each, and infant chimpanzees sell for at least twenty-five thousand dollars,
providing a high incentive for breeders to misrepresent themselves to
well-meaning research facilities attempting to retire primates. The presence of
infant primates at an establishment is often a bad sign, as breeding of
primates is prevented at legitimate sanctuaries.
Pseudo-sanctuaries
routinely accept more animals than they can comfortably care for, and the
quality of care may suffer as a result of overcrowding and lack of resources.
Offers to take large numbers of primates for little or no charge are red flags
and should be examined critically.
At
pseudo-sanctuaries, housing is often sub-standard and inappropriate for the
specific animals housed within. For example, monkeys are not given sufficient
space or internal structures for visual and physical isolation from human
observers or conspecifics. Enclosures are frequently not maintained or kept
sanitary, and they are often improperly constructed for drainage or routine
maintenance.
Veterinary
care is afforded only the critically ill or injured. Policies, staff training,
and record keeping may be nonexistent or unorganized. Operations are run on a
hand-to-mouth basis, without serious thought given to a stable future for the
animal population. Generally, no provisions have been made for the animals in
the event of a natural disaster or the death of the owner(s), which is an
important concern for anthropoid nonhuman primates, given their longevity.
Many
pseudo-sanctuaries operate as for-profit enterprises, and some of these hold
USDA licenses as exhibitors or dealers. However, a facility's nonprofit status
provides no indication of quality of care or financial security, even if it
does not breed or sell primates. Many road-side exhibitors with insufficient
care and security have nonprofit status with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
Criteria
of True Wildlife Sanctuaries
The
following is only an abbreviated list of the criteria that should distinguish
true wildlife sanctuaries. A comprehensive, itemized list is available from the
authors on request. Pivotal among the policies shared by legitimate sanctuaries
is that the sanctuary functions for the animals' welfare, and thus the animals'
needs hold the highest priority.
The
animal enclosures are designed with the needs of the inhabitants in mind. This
includes sufficient space, height, and varied internal structures for primates,
as well as means for visual and physical privacy from conspecifics and human
observers. Also, sufficient space is provided in indoor structures (either
heated boxes or covered enclosures), particularly in climates where severe
weather is possible and the animals must stay indoors for long periods. Social
groups are not too large and are appropriate for the species, and compatibility
of individuals is monitored. Enclosures are well constructed and maintained.
There
is sufficient staff to care properly for the number of animals on hand, and a
veterinarian is accessible (not necessarily on-site) for emergencies and other
care needs. Animals are monitored 24 hours a day. The personnel - paid staff
and volunteers - are well trained for their duties. Enrichment is given high
priority within their daily routines. The diet is well-balanced nutritionally
and usually includes fresh produce daily.
Animal
transfer, handling, quarantine, veterinary records, and emergency protocols are
available for review. True sanctuaries will not take in additional animals
unless there are sufficient funds to maintain the optimum level of care and
security for those already there. Legitimate wildlife sanctuaries are generally
not open to the public, and have qualified as 501(c)3 nonprofit organizations
with the IRS. An active board of directors is involved, and corporate
procedures follow IRS guidelines. IRS tax returns (Form 990) for the prior
three years are available upon request per IRS regulations.
True
sanctuaries prevent primates from breeding and never sell primates. In general,
sanctuaries should never have to transfer animals, once on the property, except
to affiliated facilities. A facility's animal transfer policies are as important
as the state of its enclosures - nice enclosures and facilities, while a
prerequisite for good sanctuaries, do not necessarily indicate a secure
environment in which the primates will not be bred and sold into the exotic pet
trade.
Location
and Placement
Identifying
a responsible sanctuary can be a difficult process. When a candidate facility
is located, it is impossible to ascertain by phone, without references or a
site visit, whether it is truly acceptable. Because legitimate facilities are
so rare, locating and/or finding appropriate referral to them can entail a
significant time investment.
Facilities
often place notices of available primates in the Primate Supply Information
Clearinghouse (PSIC) newsletter, run by Cathy Johnson-Delaney at the Washington
Regional Primate Research Center. This is a suitable means to transfer primates
between laboratories, but it is not suitable for placing them in sanctuaries.
Exotic pet breeders and dealers refer to the PSIC newsletter. Legitimate
sanctuaries generally do not refer to PSIC or respond to posted notices of
available primates. A good rule of thumb is that anyone who contacts a
laboratory offering to accomodate surplus primates does not represent a
true sanctuary.
Unfortunately,
once appropriate facilities are located, placement can be difficult,
particularly if funding is not available from the sending institution. Nearly
all responsible sanctuaries limit the number of animals they are willing to
accept in order to provide optimum care for those already living there. Few
sanctuaries have large budgets, because they are supported solely by private
and corporate foundation donations.
Most
sanctuaries are concerned about the introduction of new viruses into their
colonies. Though they are often willing to integrate small numbers of primates
into existing groups, this may not be an option for a variety of reasons (see
the following section). The incoming animals' lack of social experience may be
an obstacle to integration. Also, because there is already a surplus of monkeys
from research and the exotic pet industry needing retirement, all primates
should be vasectomized and tubally ligated before transfer.
Solutions
The
following are suggestions for overcoming the problems mentioned in the previous
section.
1.
Locating appropriate facilities and seeking consultation. Since legitimate sanctuaries rarely seek
new animals, it is necessary for research institutions to locate these
facilities themselves. As unacceptable establishments vastly outnumber acceptable
ones, it is recommended that research institutions without prior experience in
finding retirement facilities seek consultation for referral, evaluation, and
placement advice.
The
authors offer to provide free phone consultation and assist with placement.
Also, an accrediting organization named The Association of Sanctuaries (TAOS)
has been organized to monitor and provide a network of references and support
for responsible sanctuaries. The current board president of TAOS is Lynn Cuny,
who also has offered to provide assistance to facilities in need of primate
placement. Cuny is the director of Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation, a
respected wildlife sanctuary for ex-pet and ex-research primates, recently
visited separately by both authors.
2.
Evaluating candidate facilities. Since there are so many pseudo-sanctuaries, a thorough background
check is essential. Visit the facility yourself, if possible, and know what
characteristics to look for (described above). Do not take anyone's word for
his or her own facility over the phone and, if a site visit is not possible, be
sure to use reliable references.
References
and accreditation by regulating organizations should be given serious
attention. A USDA license is helpful, but it alone is not indicative of a
facility's acceptability. Because a number of animal dealers and breeders hold
USDA licenses, licensing might actually be a negative sign. If a facility does
hold a USDA license, a faxed Freedom Of Information Act request to the
appropriate regional office will yield copies of inspection reports, often
within one week. Accreditation by the American Association for Zoological Parks
and Aquariums (AZA) is usually a favorable indication, though sterilization is
still recommended before sending primates to AZA-accredited (as to any other)
facilities. Accreditation by TAOS is the most reliable means of assuring a
comfortable, secure, and permanent environment for primates, though the number
of primate facilities bearing TAOS accreditation is still small.
Most
AZA-accredited facilities will not accept common research primate species such
as macaques, baboons, and capuchin monkeys. A small number of
non-AZA-accredited zoos with acceptable practices are willing to accept these
species. These zoos should be considered (under the same criteria as
sanctuaries) when looking for placement options.
3.
Funding. Despite the
financial constraints shared by all legitimate sanctuaries, many are receptive
to retiring additional monkeys when contacted directly. The possibility of
integration is dependent on compatible species and viral status, and the social
composition and available enclosure space of existing groups. Often a sanctuary
will be able to integrate a small number of monkeys into existing social groups
and absorb the cost of care internally, although financial assistance may be
requested.
Generally,
integration into existing groups without the need of new enclosures is only
possible with small numbers of primates. However, if your facility has no
available funding for retirement, it is sometimes possible to divide your
colony among several retirement facilities. Legitimate sanctuaries will never
offer to purchase primates, and will usually request that your facility at
least arrange and pay for transportation.
If
integration into existing groups is not possible, sanctuaries will usually need
financial assistance for the construction of a new enclosure, though they will
often absorb some or all of the cost of caring for the primates once they
arrive. Costs differ according to type of enclosure needed, which depends
primarily on the species and the size and number of compatible groups that can
be formed from the monkeys being retired. For example, you can expect a new
enclosure for a compatible group of ten to twenty monkeys, including internal
areas, to cost from twenty to twenty-five thousand dollars. The facility of
origin should be willing to provide part of these costs.
4.
Viral status. Sanctuaries
are often uncomfortable about accepting B virus-positive macaques, so keep this
in mind before breeding or acquiring them, or housing them with negative or
unconfirmed animals. Sanctuaries are also reluctant to introduce new
transmissible diseases into their colonies, particularly SIV, STLV, and the
simian retroviruses (SRVs) for macaque species. However, facilities may be
flexible if funding is available to build new enclosures for infected monkeys.
New World species generally pose less of a viral risk to humans and
conspecifics. It is important to test all primates, regardless of their prior
housing, for tuberculosis before transferring them to a sanctuary.
5.
Contraception. It is
important that all primates be permanently sterilized before leaving the
facility of origin, whether or not it is requested. True sanctuaries will never
have objections to (and often will request) this, and laboratories should keep
in mind that facilities that request reproductively viable primates for any
number of reasons are probably doing so under false pretenses.
Sterilization
should be performed by tubal ligation or vasectomy, not gonadectomy, as
the former operations allow a wider range of species-typical social behavior
and interaction.
6.
Socialization. The
adjustment and integration process is facilitated if attempts are made to
socialize primates prior to departure, preferably in compatible groups. Social
experience also facilitates a primate's ability to integrate into a new social
group at the sanctuary.
It is
recommended (and USDA regulations are gradually requiring) that facilities
socially house all primates in pairs or groups when possible. This not only
facilitates future retirement, but is a vital component of a primate
laboratory's environmental enrichment program. In studies by Seelig (in prep.)
at the Coulston Foundation (White Sands Research Center) and the Language
Research Center (Georgia State University), as well as in similar studies
conducted at other facilities (Lynch, 1998; Reinhardt, 1994; Seelig, 1998), it
was found that 80% to 100% of monkeys of both sexes and all species studied can
be socialized in compatible pairs, even those with little or no prior social
experience.
Conclusion:
Post-Research Life of Primates
Secure,
post-research retirement provides monkeys and other nonhuman primates the
opportunity to live out their lives in socially and environmentally enriched
environments. To ensure that this is successfully accomplished, proper and
timely planning is essential. Before purchasing or breeding a monkey, every
research facility should include in the budget not only provision for that
primate before and during the study, but also for retirement. This requires
additional funds and might limit the number of primates you should acquire, or
might require additional planning. Consider and plan appropriately for the
additional costs and difficulties of retiring B virus-positive or
SRV/STLV/SIV-infected primates before obtaining them or conducting infectious
disease research. House all gregarious primates in compatible pairs or groups,
preferably of the same viral status, whenever possible.
When
you begin to plan retirement, you will need to research, locate, and evaluate
candidate facilities. Consultation can facilitate this process and ensure that
adequate placement is found. Therefore, we remind and encourage all research
facilities to contact either of the coauthors for advice and referral.
References
Amer.
Soc. of Primatologists (1998). Private ownership of primates.
<www.asp.org/education/private.html>
Brent,
L., Butler, T. M., & Haberstroh, J. (1997). Surplus chimpanzee crisis:
Planning for the long-term needs of research chimpanzees. Lab Animal, 26,
36-39.
Chamove,
A. (1998). Electric fence enclosures for pri-mates. Laboratory Primate
Newsletter, 37[1], 12-14.
Leslie,
M. (1998). Maintenance of non-human primates as pets. Council of State &
Territorial Epidemiologists, Position Statement ID-17. [CSTE, Suite 303, 2872
Woodcock Blvd, Atlanta, GA 30341]
Lynch,
R. (1998). Successful pair-housing of male macaques (Macaca fascicularis).
Laboratory Primate Newsletter, 37[1], 4-5.
Ostrowski,
S. R., Leslie, M. J., Parrott, T., Abelt, S., & Piercy, P. E. (1998).
B-virus from pet macaque monkeys: An emerging threat in the United States? Emerging
Infectious Diseases, 1998, 4[1].
Reinhardt,
V. (1994). Pair-housing rather than single-housing for laboratory rhesus
macaques. Journal of Medical Primatology, 23, 426-431.
Seelig,
D. (1998). Pair-housing male Macaca fascicularis: A summary. Laboratory
Primate Newsletter, 37[3], 14-16.
Seelig,
D. (In prep.). Pair-housing of adult male longtailed macaques ameliorates
stereotypic and self-injurious behavior.
van
Akker, R., Balls, M., Eichberg, J. W., Goodall, J., Heeney, J. L., Osterhaus,
A. D. M. E., Prince, A. M., & Spruit, I. (1994). Chimpanzees in AIDS
research: A biomedical and bioethical perspective. Journal of Medical
Primatology, 23, 49-51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First
author's address: 2 Glen Ct, Greenwich, CT 06830 [e-mail: david.seelig@yale.edu].
Footnote:
The Centers for Disease Control (Ostrowski, et al., 1998), the Council of State
and Territorial Epidemiologists (Leslie, 1998), and the American Society of
Primatologists (1998) have recently released statements discouraging private
ownership of primates due to disease risk and human-nonhuman primate
incompatibility in private homes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reprinted
by permission of April Truitt. Thanks
April!